PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[cheekybids]

I don't disagree, but at the same time there's another legal team who believe there's merit in the PL's case, unless they are ignoring counsel's advice.
Could there be a case that the PL don't see much merit, but want to at least be seen to have taken us to task. If they lose, then so be it, they can claim to have done their utmost and let public opinion still deem we 'wangled it' somehow.

With the APT ruling we won a very significant argument regarding loans, but we didn't win every point. Some of the subjective beliefs about Middle Eastern ownership were not deemed to be valid.

It would be a wonderful outcome if not a single allegation can be substantiated. It would be a perfect outcome if we could disprove each allegation. However, I think it's fairly reasonable to wonder what the other side is coming at us with and if the panel may interpret some things negatively.
The hurried and erroneous manner in which the charges were initially published leads me to believe they were brought forward in haste. The PL must have been under pressure from within and/or without. Hopefully, that's reflected in their case, but I'm still anticipating they'll get something to stick. The old 'throw enough mud' approach. It's worked with the general public and no panel is entirely infallible.

We know from the APT case that the Premier league ignored advice from their lawyers. It wouldn’t surprise me if they ignored in this instance.

 

[deano ou812]

We know from the APT case that the Premier league ignored advice from their lawyers. It wouldn’t surprise me if they ignored in this instance.

Maybe not so much ignored but pushed/pressurised into proceeding..

 

[halfcenturyup]

That’s not what the post says. It’s premise is the accounts are “perfectly legitimate”.

And btw I don’t agree it’s easy to get a positive audit opinion where the red flags have been raised in a very high profile company. In fact, in those scenarios companies often can’t satisfy auditors’ heightened professional scepticism so, even if a firm has historically signed off, they are forced to resign. This idea that audits happen in a vacuum is a nonsense. For years BDO have had their technical people asking for more and more comfort from the directors of City. I don’t know this from sources, I know this from absolute basic compliance requirements at professional firms.

The idea BDO haven’t asked all the tricky questions when the club has been in focus of regulators and leaks for a decade where the allegation is that the accounts are a fiction is a nonsense theory. If City are liable, BDO are either part of the cover up (they aren’t) or are another party that’s been outright lied to. But they simply must have asked many questions and been shown many key documents.

Only this.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Strange times in this thread.

First we had pages of Pinto and now we have people "anticipating they'll get something to stick. The old "throw enough mud" approach".

It may very well be that the PL will get something to "stick" but that won't be anything to do with the number of allegations, it will be entirely due to the PL's evidence, on the balance of probabilities, being more persuasive than the club's counter-evidence, and much more so if there is an indication fraud or deceit is involved. The people on the panel won't be idiots reading the Mail and trying to keep the PL happy by giving them a few "wins". Every single allegation will be considered and judged on its own merits.

I can't believe what I have been reading the last few days.

 

[halfcenturyup]

We know from the APT case that the Premier league ignored advice from their lawyers. It wouldn’t surprise me if they ignored in this instance.

It may well be true that the PL continued with the referral of allegations in February 2023 against the advice of their lawyers and under pressure from certain clubs but, personally, I'm not sure the PL had much option but to continue the process whatever the opinion of their legal team on the chances of success.

The implications for any future investigation of closing down an investigation before the PL had seen any of the significant counter-evidence available would be catastrophic and "make a mockery" of the disciplinary process, as had already been pointed out by CAS in their judgment on non-cooperation.

Once the PL had continued with the investigation after the CAS verdict, it seems to me they had no choice but see it through to its conclusion in front of an independent panel. What's more, I think the club were happy with that as it will finally draw a proper line under the whole sorry chapter. I would even go so far as to say the club manipulated the situation to force the PL down this path. A sort of "if you really want to continue with this investigation, it will cost you at least 50 million and you will still lose before a truly independent panel" approach after the CAS judgment. The club almost said as much in their statement on the allegations. Which is why I am very much of the opinion that the club has played a blinder here and has the PL exactly where it wants them.

All imho of course.